447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

Post by ilaksh » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:56 PM UTC

iliatoli wrote: post #14

Animats wrote: post #12

"A scanning-probe prototype already constitutes a functional non-volatile memory device with areal density exceeding all existing technologies by more than five orders of magnitude." Does that mean a scanning tunneling microscope is the I/O mechanism? That's been demoed for atom-level storage in the past. But it's too slow for use.

Yes, Tier 1 is scanning probe — C-AFM specifically. Slow but sufficient for proof of concept. The paper describes a Tier 2 architecture using near-field mid-IR arrays for parallel read/write, projecting 25 PB/s aggregate throughput. Tier 1 proves the physics. Tier 2 is the engineering path to speed.

Post by iliatoli » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:58 PM UTC

hgoel wrote: post #22

iliatoli wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. Three PhDs (Mathematics, Pisa; Quantum Chemistry, UCF; Materials Science, UTD — in progress), plus MS degrees from SJSU and CSU. The gmail is because this is independent work, not affiliated with any institution. v53 reflects thirteen years of development since the original 2013 publication (Graphene 1, 107–109). The barrier is verified at two independent levels of theory with a confirmed transition stat…

Is there a reason you went for 3 PhDs? Especially since they're all in STEM? To me it's a red flag because the point of a PhD is to learn to do research, you don't need to get another one to move between fields (especially within STEM), just need to do research with people in those fields and gain experience.

Post by hgoel » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 9:59 PM UTC

iliatoli wrote: post #23

hgoel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a reason you went for 3 PhDs? Especially since they're all in STEM? To me it's a red flag because the point of a PhD is to learn to do research, you don't need to get another one to move between fields (especially within STEM), just need to do research with people in those fields and gain experience.

Each PhD was in a different country and decade. Mathematics (Pisa, 2000s), Quantum Chemistry (UCF, 2010s), Materials Science (UTD, now). The fluorographane work exists because all three converge — the barrier calculation is quantum chemistry, the proof structure is mathematics, and the material is materials science. I didn't plan it this way.

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 10:02 PM UTC

iliatoli wrote: post #19

ricardobeat wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s amazing. Do you have a home lab with an atomic microscope where you do your research? And what’s the reason for going solo vs a research university, where I assume this type of research could be significantly sped up?

No lab — the work is computational. All calculations run on a Dell Precision workstation with ORCA (quantum chemistry) software. An experimental collaborator is now preparing the C-AFM validation. The solo approach is a consequence of the work spanning multiple fields that don't share a single department.

Post by iliatoli » Sat, Apr 11, 2026, 10:05 PM UTC

doctorpangloss wrote: post #26

mkprc wrote: post #4

Sniff test: a paper with a single author and 53 revisions, listing a gmail address as contact information despite the author, after a brief internet search, appearing to have affiliations with CSU Global, (maybe) the University of Central Florida, and the San Jose State University Department of Aerospace.

I suppose anyone can run the same computer simulations.